2018 (6) TMI 1294 - AT - Central Excise

Rectification of mistake - In the said application, the applicants were the Respondents whereas they have been shown as applicants - Held that - The said application, which has been decided by this Tribunal vide order dated 05.03.2018 was filed by the Revenue and Revenue was the applicant. Therefore, the application for rectification of mistake is allowed and the title of the application is rectified. The order dated 30.08.2017 was final order and against the said order, the Revenue have filed application for rectification of mistake and the same was disposed of on 05.03.2018. Against the said application also, the applicant moved application for rectification of mistake - Held that - As there is no final order passed in the show cause notice issued to the applicant for entertaining the refund claim, in that circumstance, this Tribunal has no jurisdiction to entertain the miscellaneous application filed by the applicant. Therefore, the miscellaneous application filed by the applicant is dismissed. Application disposed off.

Summary

Issues: Rectification of mistake in the title of the order; Direction for refund claim adjudication.

Rectification of Mistake in the Title of the Order:
The judgment pertains to an application for rectification of mistake in the title of an order dated 05.03.2018. The applicant, M/s. Unisule Pvt. Limited, contended that they were wrongly labeled as applicants instead of respondents in the said order. Upon review, it was found that the application in question was actually filed by the Revenue, making them the applicant. Consequently, the Tribunal allowed the rectification and corrected the title to reflect the accurate parties involved as "CCE, Rohtak - Applicant vs. M/s. Unisule Pvt. Limited Shri Rajat Doda, Director - Respondent."

Direction for Refund Claim Adjudication:
Another aspect of the judgment involved a miscellaneous application filed by the applicant seeking directions to the adjudicating authority regarding a refund claim. This application was made in light of a previous order by the Tribunal dated 30.08.2017, which had remanded the matter back to the adjudicating authority pending the resolution of a jurisdictional issue related to the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (DRI). The applicant had deposited a certain amount during the investigation and sought a refund, which had not been adjudicated upon. A protective show cause notice was issued by the Revenue, prompting the applicant to request a directive for the refund. However, the Tribunal noted that as there was no final order passed on the show cause notice, it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the applicant's miscellaneous application. Therefore, the Tribunal dismissed the applicant's request for directions in this regard.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the rectification of a mistake in the title of an order and the request for directions concerning a refund claim adjudication. The Tribunal rectified the title to accurately reflect the parties involved and dismissed the applicant's miscellaneous application for directions due to the absence of a final order on the show cause notice.